most beautiful checkmate in history of chess
Sort:
Dumbest checkmate in history!
Not checkmate
Bishop on f6 was:
Oh look! A free rook. This is my lucky day.
Bxa1 ... That was awesome, but... Oh, wait a second...
Qxg7# ... My wife is going to kill me.
Check mate? Please check it again
danyindrawan wrote:
Check mate? Please check it again
one person has tried to take this thread seriously.
when creating this puzzle, i was also considering putting a black knight on e8.
This is a good example of 'high five' chess. It's like normal chess but no piece is allowed to cross more than 5 squares in 1 move. In the mating position, the black bishop can therefore reach no further back than f6. High fives for newengland7! Isn't it ironic? Unknowingly he was serious for the first time in his life! Let's hope he survives it.
Most beautiful pointless rook and queen sacrifice in history. But one redeeming factor in this thread is you can go post your pick for Premier League 2016 winner!
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/premier-league-2016-winner
Arisktotle wrote:
This is a good example of 'high five' chess. It's like normal chess but no piece is allowed to cross more than 5 squares in 1 move. In the mating position, the black bishop can therefore reach no further back than f6. High fives for newengland7! Isn't it ironic? Unknowingly he was serious for the first time in his life! Let's hope he survives it.
I don't understand. The bishop only has to cross four squares to reach f6.
That depends on how you define 'crossing'. I suppose it could include the arrival square - or the leave square - or half of both. To only get to the number of 4 you'd need to interpret 'cross' as 'skip' and that doesn't seem right to me. Would you say that moving the bishop from a1 to b2 does not constitute even crossing a single square? Does 'crossing 5 miles' on my bike imply that I travelled 6 miles? But english is not my native language so I could be mistaken.
I think of crossing a square as like crossing a river. Swimming half way doesn't count.
I guess it depends on whether you see 'a square' as an 'object' or as a 'unit of distance'.
Language is a funny thing so lets ask the OP. With his credentials he is certain to enlighten us! 
This reminds of the repetition rule. Almost everybody - including official reports - refer to it as drawing after the 3rd repetitions while there are in fact only 2. The original position is no repeat of itself and doesn't count. That is why I prefer the acronym 3P (3 times the same position) over 3R (3 repetitions).
Arisktotle wrote:
I guess it depends on whether you see 'a square' as an 'object' or as a 'unit of distance'.
Language is a funny thing so lets ask the OP. With his credentials he is certain to enlighten us!
This reminds of the repetition rule. Almost everybody - including official reports - refer to it as drawing after the 3rd repetitions while there are in fact only 2. The original position is no repeat of itself and doesn't count. That is why I prefer the acronym 3P (3 times the same position) over 3R (3 repetitions).
I like Arikstotle's position.
I don't understand. Black can escape with Ke7.
Come to think of it, I'm not sure why I even raised the question. I should have just turned to the official description of high five chess. But I will need Arisktotle's help in finding it.
Most beautiful checkmate in history of chess:
1. f4 e5 2. g4 Qh4 #
The fun thing is I once had something like the following moves in a serious(!) game:
1. f4 e6 2. Nf3 d5 3. g4! c5 4. Ne5!! Qh4#
And I was White
at the risk of looking like an idiot ....
the obvious move for black would be to simply play bxq
it looks like an easy win for black rather than a "checkmate" .....
what the hell am i overlooking here?
You are overlooking that this is a wanker-troll thread